Brill environment group correspondence with Greg Smith MP

Brill Environment Group, 27 The Square, Brill HP18 9RP
March 28th, 2022

Dear Mr Smith,

We, the Brill Environment Group, the undersigned voters in your constituency, are passionate about the natural environment. Our aims as a group are to inform people about nature and wildlife, and to encourage action in defence of a flourishing and diverse community, both plant and animal. As a result we are much concerned about Climate Change. We already see reductions in insect life, failures of pollination and drastic weather as changes in seasons disrupt the seasonal pattern of plants, insects and predators. My son’s birthday used to coincide with the flowering of horse chestnuts for example, but now the chestnuts flower at least two weeks earlier. Many trees have fallen in our village due to storms.

We were concerned therefore to hear of your link to a group called Net Zero Scrutiny Group. We are of course not in favour of wasted money but treating the economy and environment as if it were the budget of a household on a fixed income doesn’t make sense to us. The environment is more like a farm. One has to spend money on seed and equipment if one is to get a harvest. So we believe developing sustainable energy sources and, most especially, energy storage systems is part of normal expenditure on infrastructure. It will improve the environment and the economy, increase productivity, and purchasing power. If the NZSG is taking a view that government spending is intrinsically waste, then it is falling into the error that prolonged and made more severe the depression of 1929.

We would be very keen to hear your views on the position taken by NZSG and on other environmental issues and would be grateful if you could set out your thoughts on this for us.

We look forward to hearing from you,
Yours Sincerely,
Brill Environment Group

Nicky Misselbrook, Chair (HP18 9TY) - Jayne Gibson-Harris, Vice Chair (HP18 9TH) - Emi Slater, Secretary (HP18 9RP) - Dave Chetham, Treasurer (HP18 9RU) - Jill Wolfe (HP18 9SN) - David Munson (HP18 9ST) - Andre Mclean (HP18 9RU) Jez Gibson- Harris (HP18 9TH)

We sadly live in an age whereby anyone who questions elements of environmental policy, net zero ambitions or ‘green’ initiatives is far too easily branded a ‘climate change denier’ or similar.  That is an utter nonsense and deeply unhelpful to actually getting this important area of policy right.  I cannot stress firmly enough, I believe we do need to decarbonise, we do need to rise to the environmental challenges our country and planet faces.  It is because I care about this so much I want to question what government is doing and be sure it will work.  Frankly, so far, whilst there is a great deal to be proud of, I am not sure everything is on the right path and people are being locked into considerable expense for technologies that in the long term just won’t work and in the short term shut off important transitional arrangements in the name of blind ideology. 

Let’s take energy.  It is clearly important the UK moves towards more sustainable energy sources, this should be done in an affordable and gradual way that does not hammer homeowners. The cost of living crisis the country faces must be the immediate priority. I fear the speed of switch to renewable energy will heap more pressure on households struggling with energy bill and tax rises.  We need a sensible, long-term energy strategy. Britain often sustains periods of weather when the wind does not blow and we have overcast skies. News headlines in recent days have demonstrated how far nuclear technology has come and the solutions it will provide to millions of homes and businesses in the medium term, yet it seems debate is being stifled to suggest we plump for 2022 tech at the cost of all else right now rather than rationally waiting for the “better” tech of tomorrow.  Small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs), for example, can generate 440 megawatts with a carbon footprint a tenth the size of a reactor site. SMRs are compact and easily transported. The Government is rightly spending on developing this technology.  

We also need other sources of affordable energy. I believe in the short-term we should liberate the private sector to go for gas so we are not dependent on unreliable regimes abroad and keep some coal power plants on stream to deal with shortages.  Geological surveys have also shown that we have substantial gas and oil reserves in shale that, with fracking, could satisfy our fuel needs for years.

We have a window of opportunity to advance better alternatives that provide affordable, plentiful power, though we are spending too little on the research required to develop them. With the right funding and incentives, this technology could provide substitutes that people will adopt willingly.

We have to be equally honest that bringing the UK’s housing stock to net zero carbon emissions will be difficult and there are enormous practical difficulties to be dealt with. I do believe the Government must be upfront with voters about the challenges involved. In an area like North Buckinghamshire many homes cannot even be insulated for example, such as the homes of whychert construction that simply have to be able to breath or they’ll literally fall over.  Heat pumps for many older properties just won’t touch the sides, yet criticism of them is too often met with derision. 

The UK’s Net Zero pledge is one of the most aggressive targets in the world. It is right that these commitments are properly scrutinised by parliamentarians.  Let’s get this right.

Kind regards
Greg